REALITY CHECK: Obama Received About the Same
Percentage from Small Donors in 2008 as Bush in 2004

Obama also raised 80% more from large donors than small,
outstripping all rivals and predecessors

It turns out that Barack Obama's donors may not have been quite as
different as we had thought. Throughout the election season, this
organization and others have been reporting that Obama received about
half of his discrete contributions in amounts of $200 or less. The
Campaign Finance Institute (CFI) noted in past releases that donations
are not the same as donors, since many people give more than once.
After a more thorough analysis of data from the Federal Election
Commission (FEC), it has become clear that repeaters and large donors
were even more important for Obama than we or other analysts had fully
appreciated.

"The myth is that money from small donors dominated Barack Obama's
finances," said CFI's executive director Michael J. Malbin. "The
reality of Obama's fundraising was impressive, but the reality does not
match the myth."

Main Small Donor Findings

To look more fully at presidential candidates' fundraising during this
cycle, CFI conducted an extensive analysis of FEC records to identify
repeat donors and to categorize each donor's giving according to the cumulative amount he or she gave over the course of a full election cycle.

Although an unusually high percentage (49%) of Obama's funds came in discrete contributions of $200 or less
(see Table
3),
only 26% of his money through August 31 (and 24% of his funds through
October 15, according to the most recent FEC reports) came from donors
whose total contributions aggregated to $200 or less. Obama's 26% compares to 25% for George W. Bush in 2004, 20% for John Kerry in 2004,
21% for John McCain in 2008, 13% for Hillary Clinton in 2008, and 38% for Howard Dean in 2004.

Mid-Range Repeaters

After merging the donor records, combining multiple records from those
who gave more than one disclosed contribution, CFI concluded that about
403,000 different people had given enough money (more than $200) by
August 31 to have their names disclosed. This increased to about
580,000 by October 15. By comparison, CFI found that about 475,000
discrete donors gave disclosed contributions to all candidates combined
in 2003-2004.

Obama raised 27% of his money from people whose aggregated
contributions fell in a middle range ($201-$999). John Kerry, who also
relied on Internet fundraising after clinching the nomination, raised
an almost comparable 24% from mid-range donors. McCain's mid-range
supplied 20% of his total. Bush received only 13% from this group.

Many of the repeat donors who started off small ended up in the
$201-$999 middle range. Among Obama's total pool of 403,000 disclosed
donors on August 31, more than half (about 212,000) started off by
giving undisclosed contributions of $200 or less. About 93,000 of these
repeaters gave in cumulative amounts of no more than $400 for the full
primary season. Another 106,000 repeaters ended up between $401 and
$999. By comparison, Clinton and McCain each had about 100,000 donors
in the entire $200-$999 middle range, and for them the number included
both repeaters and one-time givers.

Finally, not many of Obama's 212,000 small-donor repeaters ended up in
the top group. Despite colorful press stories, only about 13,000
crossed the $1,000 threshold in their cumulative contributions.

Because of the length of Obama's battle with Clinton for the
nomination, his rejection of public financing for the general election,
his personal charisma and, most importantly, because of the way he
organized his campaign, Obama was able to use the Internet to go back
to go the same supporters over and over again for both volunteer
assistance and repeat contributions. These repeaters account for the
difference between the past reports that focused on small contributions
and the aggregates we are able to provide now.

Small Donors

We know less about people who stayed at $200 or below because $201 is
the trigger for FEC disclosure. Obama's staff says that more than 3
million people contributed to his campaign. We cannot verify this
number independently but we consider it to be plausible. Since about
$156 million of Obama's funds as of Oct. 15 had come from donors whose
contributions had not broken the $200 disclosure threshold (see Table 1),
accepting the staff's statement (and subtracting the number of
disclosed donors) would mean that an estimated 2.5 million undisclosed
donors gave a cumulative average of about $62 each. This figure is
consistent with the amount CFI has calculated for the typical
undisclosed donor in past elections and is also consistent with survey
research. Obama's innovation would not be in the amount he raised from
each small donor, but in the number of such people he was able to
reach. His 2.5 million small donors would be in the same general range
as CFI's published estimate for the number of small donors who gave to
all candidates combined in 2004 (anywhere from 2.0 to 2.8 million).

Large Donors

Finally, Obama received about 80% more money from large
donors (cumulative contributions of at least $1,000) than from small
donors. While the large donors thus were responsible for much more of
Obama's money than either his small or middle range group, he received
somewhat less proportionally from large donors than did his rivals or
predecessors. Forty-seven percent of Obama's money came from large
donors compared to 56% for Kerry and 60% for both Bush and McCain.
However, because Obama's 47% is based on a larger total, that means he
also raised significantly more large-donor money in absolute terms than
any of his rivals or predecessors.

Much of this money was raised the "old fashioned" way. Since only about
13,000 of those who started out small for Obama ended up crossing the
$1,000 threshold, that means the bulk of Obama's $213 million in
large-donor contributions during the primaries came from about 85,000
people who started out giving big and stayed there. Much of this
large-donor money – perhaps close to a majority – came to the campaign through bundling methods initially perfected by Bush.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) – which in the
absence of legally mandated disclosure had to use information provided
by the campaigns – 561 "bundlers" had raised a minimum of $63 million
for Obama by mid-August and 534 people had raised a minimum of $75
million for McCain. The bundlers undoubtedly were responsible for more
than these amounts because the campaigns reported the bundlers in
ranges and CRP's minimum totals were based conservatively on the low
end of each range. A reasonable guess might estimate the real amount at
about 50% above the minimum – the mid-point for each range – yielding a
total of perhaps about $90 million for Obama as of mid-August and more
than $100 million for McCain.

At the top of the bundlers were 47 of Obama's and 65 of McCain's who
were listed by the campaigns in mid-August as being responsible for at
least $500,000 each. In addition, Public Citizen lists 2,205 people as
having contributed in their own names at least $25,000 to joint
fundraising committees supporting Obama and 1,846 people as having made
similar contributions to joint fundraising committees supporting
McCain.

Conclusion

These totals force a reality check. In McCain's case, a $100 million
figure from bundlers would represent almost all of the money he raised
from large donors ($122 million). In Obama's case, one should combine
the estimated $90 million or so he received with the help of bundlers
through August with the remaining $120 million or so from other large
donors, and then compare it to the $119 million he raised from small
donors through August. The comparison should make one think twice
before describing small donors as the financial engine of the Obama
campaign.

None of these findings denies the importance of either Obama's appeal
to repeat donors or his innovative use of online social networking
tools to interweave appeals for contributions and critically important
campaign volunteers. In particular, Obama did attract repeaters who
have not been part of the traditional large-dollar, reception-attending
fundraising crowd. The fact is that Obama's financial juggernaut broke
records at all contribution levels. The reality does not match the
myth, but the reality itself was impressive.

NOTE: This report was written by CFI's Executive Director Michael J.
Malbin. The donor research was done by CFI's System Manager, Brendan
Glavin and Research Analyst Aaron Dusso, who is also a political
science Ph.D. candidate at The George Washington University.